Monday, 4 January 2016

We
are writing this letter as we have serious concerns regarding the DDRB report
relating to contract reform which was published on 16th July 20151 which has formed
the foundations for many of your proposed NHS reforms. The DDRB report stated “We find the case for
expanded seven-day services in the NHS, in order to address the ‘weekend
effect’ on patient outcomes to be compelling”.
This was largely based on evidence presented by NHS England which was
unpublished at the time of submission.
Subsequently this work has been published as an ‘analysis’ article, not
a ‘research’ piece, in which the authors stated that it was both ‘rash and misleading’
to assume that the weekend effect was avoidable2. This demonstrates the overall significant
disconnect between the way in which the DDRB report has interpreted this
evidence and the way it has been presented in the British Medical Journal.

The following concerns we ask you to respond to specifically
are detailed below:

1.The oral evidence submitted to the DDRB is not published
and both the DDRB and Department of Health are resisting attempts at making
this available to the public. If this
evidence demonstrates that service reform is in the best interests of patients,
then why do you not make this process fully transparent?

2.The mortality data was mentioned by you in a
speech on the 16th July 2015 despite the fact that the DDRB report
was only published on this day. The
Department of Health are currently resisting attempts to reveal who first made
you aware of this data and when. When
did you first become aware of the mortality data that was later published in
the BMJ and how did this occur? Would
you care to publish the documentation relating to this matter?

3.The authors of the BMJ study declared no
competing interests. The Department of
Health are currently resisting attempts to reveal your discussion of this study
with other individuals including those from government and NHS England. Who did you discuss the mortality data with
and when? Would you care to publish the
documentation relating to these discussions?

4.You attended several meetings with various
editorial teams over the course of 2014 including those from newspapers such as
the Sun, Sunday Mail and Telegraph. It
has been stated by the Department of Health that these meetings are not minuted
and that the full attendees are not even recorded. Have you discussed the mortality data with
the media in these meetings and if so, was this done before the DDRB report was
published? Also is it best practice to
attend meetings with the media and not document even a rough summary of what
has been discussed?

5.The DDRB remit meeting occurred in September
2014 involving Professor Curran and Department of Health representatives
including Dr Dan Poulter, while Professor Curran met with Lord Prior on 16th
July 2015 to discuss the DDRB report.
The Department of Health are resisting attempts at making information
relating to these meetings available to the public. Would you care to publish the documentation
relating to these meetings?

It is notable that many truly world class 7 day services
have already been achieved in the NHS with current contracts, in areas such as
cardiology, trauma, stroke and intensive care.
While there is no doubt that service quality can always be improved, it
appears that contract reform is not necessary for further improvements. While it appears that forcing staff to do
more antisocial work for no extra reward during widespread recruitment and
retention crises is only going to make further service improvements totally
unachievable and create more potentially dangerous rota gaps.

David Cameron has spoken on numerous occasions on the power
of transparency to raise standards3, while you have
made clear that transparency is vital in creating a ‘world class’ NHS4. The significance of these concerns is that
should they remain unaddressed it both demonstrates that there is a severe
disconnect between your talk on transparency and your actions in government,
and that your raft of NHS reforms is based upon a process whose key nuts and
bolts remain hidden from public view,

About the fancier

The fancier is a frontline worker in the NHS and he is not a fan of the prescribed government reform. As you can see he is named above as per GMC guidance.

The views expressed of the ferret fancier are those of the author and no one else. They most certainly do not represent NHS policy. If you have any complaints about the content or opinion contained within then please email the fancier who will be happy to respond personally to address these.

Other bloggers are welcome to extract from what they find on these pages, but please reference back from whence it came. If anyone wants to extract bits for other non-blogging purposes then please get in touch, as long as you are not a toilet roll manufacturer.